8 There is also an unlikely occurrence in
CUNES 51-01-100 (=CUSA 1,
149), which is disregarded in the present analysis because the shape of this and other numerical signs, present in the same case (O0103), do not allow a reliable identification of the signs themselves.

11 Assuming for the barig (N1) a value of approximately 24 liters (according to P. Damerow and R. K. Englund, “Die Zahlzeichensysteme der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk,” in M. W. Green and H. J. Nissen, Zeichenliste der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk [=ATU 2; Berlin 1987] 153-154, fn. 60), 1N16 represents about 1/4 of a liter. It is worth noting that in later periods the minimum value of the rations due to the lowest class of workers (dumu) amounted to 10 sila3 per month (cf S. Monaco, “Parametri e Qualificatori nei testi economici della terza Dinastia di Ur,” OrAnt 24, 21ff.). This value corresponds to a daily ration amounting to 1/3 sila3, equivalent to approximately 1/4 liter (based on a sila3 value of 5/6 liter), i.e., the same value represented by 1N16. Whether such a coincidence implies a continuity in the Mesopotamian administrative ration system of the 3rd millennium shall be left to a study that is beyond the scope of the present analysis.